1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. Family benefits and funeral expenses that the Defendant provided to the Plaintiffs on January 6, 2012.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The deceased G (H students, hereinafter “the deceased”) worked in I et al. from February 1957 to November 1, 1975.

B. On May 22, 2008, the Deceased was determined as pneumoconiosis-type 2/2 and chronological chronitis (ef) as a result of a close examination of pneumoconiosis symptoms, and was determined as a beneficiary of medical care benefits, and died on October 22, 201 after being treated at L Hospital, etc., and was killed on October 22, 201.

A doctor who diagnosed the death of the deceased determined that the direct death of the deceased, the intermediate event is “satisfying”, “satchitis”, “satfying type”, and the cause of the preceding death, as “malination of pneumoconiosis.”

C. On October 17, 201, the Plaintiffs asserted that the deceased died of pneumoconiosis, which is an occupational disease, and that there was a combination thereof, and filed a claim for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses with the Defendant’s Boan branch office on January 6, 201. However, on January 6, 2012, the Defendant rendered a decision on the site payment (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the deceased died of a heart disease, such as a brue’s heart disease, not due to pneumoconiosis and its combination.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the deceased died from a acute respiratory disorder caused by the pneumoconiosis, which is an occupational disease, the pulmonary disease, the pulmonary disease, the pulmonary disease, and the chronic pulmonary disease, and even if the direct cause of death of the deceased was not the pulmonary disease but the heart disease, the above pulmonary disease aggravated the heart disease such as the heart and caused the death of the deceased. As such, there is a proximate causal relationship between the deceased’s death and the pulmonary disease, the occupational disease, and the pulmonary disease.

Therefore, the instant disposition based on a different premise should be revoked as it is unlawful.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. 1) The Deceased’s career and treatment progress (A.) From February 1957 to November 1, 1964.